2980 items matching your search terms
IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2016-CHC-000071 Under section 274 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Between ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED Applicant And MACKENZIE DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent NOTICE OF MT GERALD STATION LIMITED’S WISH TO BE PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS 1 DECEMBER 2016 Duncan Cotterill Solicitor acting: Katherine Forward PO Box 5, Christchurch Phone +64 3 379 2430 Fax +64 3 379 7...
IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2016-CHC-000071 Under section 274 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Between ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED Applicant And MACKENZIE DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent NOTICE OF THE WOLDS STATION LIMITED’S WISH TO BE PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS 1 DECEMBER 2016 Duncan Cotterill Solicitor acting: Katherine Forward PO Box 5, Christchurch Phone +64 3 379 2430 Fax +64 3 379 7...
...proceedings. D. I, proforma, oppose applications as set out in my submission for the reason given in my submission and as may be amended following. REASONS 1. The lack of complete consideration of adverse effects arising from incr·eased runoff and environmental contaminates from sealed, semisealed surfaces and unsealed surfaces. f For all reasons given in opposition in other submissions. To better give effect to the purposes of the RMA. I do not oppose the overall intent of...
...report from the Council. Joint memorandum of parties dated 6 October 2022 By joint memorandum dated 6 October 2022, the parties advised that they have had positive discussions surrounding the abatement notice, the work at the property and the environmental effects on the notable tree. The Council will provide Ms Mokaraka with advice from a Council Arborist as to any immediate and long-term effects of the veranda, building and deck to the notable tree. Ms Mokaraka has in turn co...
...I, pro forma, oppose applications as set out in my submission for the reason given in my submission and as may be amended following. REASONS 1. The lack of complete consideration of adverse effects arising from increased runoff and environmental contaminates from sealed, semisealed surfaces and unsealed surfaces. 2. To better give effect to the purposes of the RMA. 3. I do not oppose the overall intent of the proposal. 4. The nature of this project gives...
...under s 71 of the principal Act, rather than authorisation under s 53. 6. We have concluded that the Bill appears to be consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the Bill of Rights Act. Edrick Child Chief Legal Counsel 1 Environmental Law Initiative v The Director-General of the Department of Conservation [2025] NZHC 391.
...and the assessment of the Bioresearches report on Benthic Sediment Quality (which I wrote together with my colleague Dr Shane Geange) (10 June 2014);1 18.5 Park's 2014 review of the ecology and water quality components of the assessment of environmental effects (Park 2014a,b); 18.6 the Cawthron Institute's report on ecological surveys, and accompanying video imagery, undertaken on Astrolabe Reef in February 2015 (Barter & Dunmore 2015); 18.7 the report from the Caw...
...2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT 2.1 The Court�s Jurisdiction The Environment Court is established by section 247 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act), as a Court of Record. It is a specialist Court that has jurisdiction over environmental and resource management matters. It can be characterised as follows: � a Judge usually presides at sittings to hear and determine proceedings; � it is required by law to act judicially; � it hears contesting parties to the pr...
...already been made at these processes. It may be important for the case-managing judge to be alert to this sort of issue. [28] While mentioning the thinking of Judge Rackemann, it is interesting to read a recent article by him in the National Environmental Law Review, 1 the official journal of the National Environmental Law Association of Australia. I will leave those interested to read the article, but simply note here that Judge Rackemann offers an interesting critique of the...
...primary factor relevant to the exercise of the discretion to award costs. The Court observed (at [30]) that in proceedings where a right of appeal is limited to points of law “it was imperative that the application, together with the assessment of environmental effects and the evidence to be called in support, was thoroughly prepared.” The Court outlined some differences in the scope and conduct of a first instance hearing compared with an appeal, concluding that “the differen...